Technology blog + Energy efficiency | The Guardianhttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog+environment/energyefficiency
Indexen-gbGuardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. 2015Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:35:56 GMT2015-03-03T20:35:56Zen-gbGuardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. 2015The Guardianhttp://assets.guim.co.uk/images/guardian-logo-rss.c45beb1bafa34b347ac333af2e6fe23f.pnghttp://www.theguardian.com
The Internet of Things: a tangled webhttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2013/nov/25/internet-of-things-connected-world
For 25 years, we've been promised a connected world, but progress doesn't seem to match the glowing predictions.<p><strong>The presentation is straightforward and enticing:</strong></p><p><em>Picture this: A 25&cent;; smart chip inside a light-bulb socket. Networked through the 110V wires, it provides centralised on-off control and monitors the bulb's 'health' by constantly measuring electrical resistance. Imagine the benefits in a large office, with thousands, or even tens of thousands of fixtures. Energy is saved as lighting is now under central, constantly adaptable control. Maintenance is easier, pinpointed, less expensive: Bulbs are changed at precisely the right time, just before the filament burns out.<br /></em><em>Now, add this magic chip to any and all appliances and visualise the enormity of the economic and ease-of-use benefits. This is no dream … we're already working on agreements in energy-conscious Scandinavia.</em></p> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2013/nov/25/internet-of-things-connected-world">Continue reading...</a>InternetTechnologyAppsEnergy efficiencyEnergyInternet of thingsMon, 25 Nov 2013 11:13:41 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2013/nov/25/internet-of-things-connected-worldMatthiolaC/AlamyCisco's chief futurist says that within 10 years, there will be 50bn connected things in the world, with trillions of connections. Photograph: MatthiolaC/AlamyMatthiolaC/AlamyCisco's chief futurist says that within 10 years, there will be 50bn connected things in the world, with trillions of connections. Photograph: MatthiolaC/AlamyJean-Louis Gassée2013-11-25T11:13:41ZLive blogged: The UK's new energy future | Damian Carringtonhttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jul/12/electricity-reform-energy-nuclear-carbon
Read how Chris Huhne set out the government's plan for cutting the UK's carbon emissions, while keeping the lights on, at a price people can afford. Plus: all the reaction<p><strong>This live blog has now ended.</strong> You <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jul/12/electricity-reform-energy-nuclear-carbon#block-22">jump straight to my sum up</a>, if you like, or just read through in chronological order.</p><p>.</p><p>These reforms will secure our energy future. They will get us off the fossil fuel hook and on to clean, green and secure energy. Crucially, they will keep bills lower than they would be if we stuck with the existing arrangements. </p><p>If we were to leave the market as it is now, we estimate electricity bills will be around &pound;200 higher in 2030 compared with today's average annual household bill (about &pound;500). But if we act now - reform the market and get the secure clean energy we need more cost-effectively - we estimate we can limit this increase to &pound;160. This is &pound;40 lower than it would otherwise be.</p><p>Keeping the lights on and tackling climate change is in consumers' long term interests. However, consumers can't be expected to write a blank cheque to decarbonise electricity generation.</p><p>If today's policy is to be the least worse option for consumers it needs to be done in the most cost effective way. In order to deliver value for money and minimise the impact on consumers, Government must ensure that: consumers on the lowest incomes are protected; a step change in energy efficiency is delivered; the energy market becomes more competitive.</p><p>Last year the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/29/uk-global-green-investment-rankings">UK plummeted from 5th to 13th in the clean-tech investor rankings</a> and there is nothing in this week's energy policy paper that will reverse that trend. Our competitive position will continue to slide until the coalition come to a common view about the role of green growth in the UK's economic recovery.</p><p>Making energy demand reduction a priority is a huge and necessary strategic shift. For 20 years the design of the electricity market has effectively blocked investment in the demand side. This has raised costs to consumers and increased our exposure to volatile global energy markets.</p><p>As Huhne spoke, note how little he mentions climate change and emissions and how often he talks about keeping the lights on. This is the government's new mantra, to try to counter the critics who rail against green taxes putting energy prices up.</p><p>The cover of the EMR white paper bills it as a plan for &quot;secure, affordable and low carbon electricity&quot;. Note the order in which those words appear.</p><p>Huhne rejected the claim that the reforms would favour nuclear power. He said no public subsidy would be given to the nuclear industry. However, while this is true, observers have noted that putting a minimum price on carbon would enable nuclear plants to make higher profits by penalising fossil fuel competitors, and the new long term contracts are also likely to favour nuclear power.</p><p>A Carbon Price Floor (announced in Budget 2011) to reduce investor uncertainty, putting a fair price on carbon and providing a stronger incentive to invest in low-carbon generation now</p><p>The introduction of new long-term contracts (Feed-in Tariff with Contracts for Difference) to provide stable financial incentives to invest in all forms of low-carbon electricity generation. A contract for difference approach has been chosen over a less cost-effective premium feed-in tariff</p><p>An Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) set at 450g CO2/kWh to reinforce the requirement that no new coal-fired power stations are built without CCS, but also to ensure necessary short-term investment in gas can take place</p><p>A Capacity Mechanism, including demand response as well as generation, which is needed to ensure future security of electricity supply. We are seeking further views on the type of mechanism required and will report on this around the turn of the year.</p><p>The Government will put in place effective transitional arrangements to ensure there is no hiatus in investment while the new system is established.</p><p>'It is vital that these reforms work. The Government must therefore consult not only with the industry but with the opposition, to get cross-party support for its proposals. If the required levels of investment are to be made, investors need to know that these reforms are for the long term. There are not many issues on which Labour will wish to work with the Coalition, or vice-versa, but this has to be one of them.'</p><p>The shift to low-carbon power contracts marks a qualitative toughening of UK energy policy, and is a significant step forward. There are also some promising signs that the coalition will create a market for negawatts [energy efficiency] to match the one for low carbon megawatts. However, because the Coalition are still undecided on green growth much of the detail needed by investors is missing. Sadly this means the UK will continue to underperform in the clean energy investment rankings until the volume and price of renewable contracts is clearer.</p><p>I welcome efforts to address the UK's dependence on fossil fuels and boost investment in renewables, there is no doubt that the government's circuitous Electricity Market Reform is a love letter to nuclear power. The introduction of a carbon price floor is set to gift huge windfall handouts of around &pound;50m a year to existing generators – making a mockery of the Coalition pledge not to subsidise the industry. To claw back this money for the taxpayer, the government should levy a windfall tax on nuclear.</p><p>We know that energy efficiency and demand management measures play a key role in tackling rising bills and lifting people out of fuel poverty – yet they are absent from the EMR. The Government should use the full revenue from the EMR to invest directly in energy efficiency and demand reduction, and measures to reduce fuel poverty.</p><p>There are six winners from today's white paper and millions of losers. The winners, yet again, are the big six energy suppliers who have been given a continued license to pocket rather than save customers money. For the millions of consumers, many now living in fuel poverty, this white paper just increased the amount they will have to fork out each year on their energy bills without fundamentally changing the foundations for a shift to energy efficient and clean, renewable energy economy. </p><p>This is the opportunity to put power back in the hands of the people - not just the six big energy companies - and to unleash the potential of the UK's wind, waves, tides and sun. The Government must help insulate homes, get new companies to invest in renewable energy and support communities to generate their own power.</p><p>Today's White Paper gives Britain more control over its energy future. This will transform the market and ensure customers will benefit from stability, security, affordability and predictability.<br />Current UK electricity prices are driven by volatile fossil fuel prices, which are subject to global events outside Britain's control. As a result, the country is exposed to spiraling energy costs.<br />Today's announcement puts customers' needs at the heart of the market. It encourages investment in generation which is both low carbon and not dependent on fossil fuel prices. This is good news for customers, policy makers and investors. Electricity Market Reform means that cost will be kept to a minimum.</p><p>This is a bold step by the government to give the electricity industry confidence to invest in a low carbon power industry. Electricity producers are already big investors in the UK, but the investment required by 2020 - about &pound;200 billion across the energy sector - is enormous and far too much for the industry to contemplate without attracting new capital.</p><p>'Reforming the electricity market to meet these [carbon emission] targets inevitably comes at a price. The government will have to assure itself of the cost effectiveness of its measures and both government and the industry must be open and honest about the cost.</p><p>We need a clear picture of the implications of the cumulative cost of climate and energy policy. This will be critical in reassuring manufacturers who are planning to invest in Britain that their competitiveness will not be damaged by allowing electricity prices to get out of line with their major competitors.<br />The government must introduce the promised package of compensatory measures for energy intensive sectors in order to safeguard their international competitiveness.</p><p><br />Households and businesses across the UK face a future of power blackouts unless they help to pay for major new investments in the country's creaking infrastructure, the energy secretary warned on Tuesday.</p><p>&quot;We have to stop dithering – you can have blackouts or you can have investment. Which do you want?&quot; asked Chris Huhne, unveiling a package of far-reaching reforms in the biggest shake-up of the electricity market since privatisation.</p><p>&quot;A government which allows prices to rise is unpopular but a government which allows the lights to go out is unelectable.&quot;</p><p>The White Paper may throw a few crumbs of comfort to the renewables industry, but in reality it is all about getting new nuclear power stations built. It will cost consumers and the environment dear, and can only be seen as a short term package to support the nuclear industry in general, and EDF in particular.</p><p>The measures in the White Paper are not going to have an impact on consumer prices in the short term, because this is about facilitating an investment programme that's probably only going to kick off properly in 2014 - 16. However there is inevitability here, that this is a massive capital investment programme and will flow down the line to consumers.</p><p>It is disappointing that the government have not taken the opportunity to remove unnecessary complexity. There are still too many policies in this package to achieve the government's stated aims. The Emissions Performance Standard remains part of the plans, despite it being superfluous.</p> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jul/12/electricity-reform-energy-nuclear-carbon">Continue reading...</a>EnvironmentEnergyEnergy billsEnergy efficiencyEnergy industryEnergyTechnologyBusinessNuclear powerCoalGasGasTue, 12 Jul 2011 13:55:00 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jul/12/electricity-reform-energy-nuclear-carbonAnthony Devlin/PAThe sun is setting on the UK's liberalised electricity market, with government interventions to ensure sufficient low-carbon energy will be generated to meet targets for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PAAnthony Devlin/PAThe sun setting behind electricity pylons in Bromley. The Government has claimed measures to transform the electricity market will save consumers money over the next two decades, as it reveals its plans for reform, July 12, 2011. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PADamian Carrington2011-07-12T13:55:00ZCES 2011: Greenpeace and green electronics | Videohttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/video/2011/jan/09/greenpeace-ces-2011
Jered Abrams and Guardian technology editor <strong>Charles Arthu</strong>r speak to Greenpeac's Daniel Kessler about the environmental friendliness of electronics manufacturers, at the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/video/2011/jan/09/greenpeace-ces-2011">Continue reading...</a>CES 2011TechnologyGadgetsGreenpeaceEnergyEnergy efficiencyRecyclingMon, 10 Jan 2011 09:22:56 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/video/2011/jan/09/greenpeace-ces-2011guardian.co.uk/guardian.co.ukGreenpeace at the CES 2011 in Las Vegas
Photograph: guardian.co.ukGuardian Staff2011-01-10T09:22:56ZWill cloud computing become the RyanAir of the future?http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2009/may/11/internet-energy-guilt
<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/poptech2006/2966246171/"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3190/2966246171_e17e550472.jpg" width="460" alt="Saul Griffith at Pop!Tech, photograph used under CC license from Kris Krug/Pop!Tech" /></a><br /><em><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/poptech2006/2966246171/">Pop!Tech 2008 - Saul Griffith</a>: Photograph by Kris Krug/Pop!Tech, used under CC license</em></p><p>A while back I went to meet <a href="http://www.saulgriffith.com/">Saul Griffith</a>, a shoeless Australian inventor, entrepreneur and <a href="http://boingboing.net/2007/09/24/saul-griffith-wins-m.html">card-carrying genius</a>. It's fair to say that Saul, who works from the control tower of an abandoned airfield nestled by the San Francisco Bay, is obsessed with energy.</p> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2009/may/11/internet-energy-guilt">Continue reading...</a>EnergyEnergy efficiencyEnergyComputingInternetTechnologyMon, 11 May 2009 18:17:23 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2009/may/11/internet-energy-guiltBobbie Johnson, San Francisco2009-05-11T18:17:23ZLeo Hickman on the carbon cost of Googlinghttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/jan/12/carbon-emissions-google
Climate researchers say two Google searches emit 7g of CO2 – the same as boiling an electric kettle. Do their numbers add up?<p>Can two Google searches really produce as much carbon dioxide as boiling enough water in an electric kettle for a cup of tea? That's what <a href="http://www.alexwg.org/">Alex Wissner-Gross</a>, an environmental fellow at Harvard University, is claiming. &quot;Google operates huge data centres around the world that consume a great deal of power,&quot; says Wissner-Gross in <a href="http://redorbit.com/news/technology/1621082/the_carbon_footprint_of_google_searches_revealed/index.html">forthcoming research</a> about the environmental impact of computing, which calculates that every Google search produces 7g of CO2. &quot;Google are very efficient, but their primary concern is to make searches fast and that means they have a lot of extra capacity that burns energy.&quot;</p><p>It should probably be noted at this point that Wissner-Gross is also the co-founder of Enernetics, and its associated website <a href="http://www.co2stats.com/">www.CO2stats.com</a>, which, according to the <a href="http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2008/09/22/story14.html">Boston Business Journal</a>, allows &quot;websites to get analysis of how energy-efficient they are and sells carbon offsets to help them reach a neutral status&quot;. So let's first congratulate Wissner-Gross on getting himself and his company talked about all over the internet, including here. But does his claim stack up?</p> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/jan/12/carbon-emissions-google">Continue reading...</a>Greenhouse gas emissionsEnvironmentTechnologyGoogleEnergyEnergy efficiencyInternetClimate changeSearch enginesScienceEnergy researchMon, 12 Jan 2009 13:28:56 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/jan/12/carbon-emissions-googleTorsten Sills/AFPNet giant Google is central to our lives – but is it energy efficient? Photograph: AFPLeo Hickman2009-01-12T13:28:56ZOnline video vote to decide $10m green technology prizehttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2008/nov/24/xprize-energy
Three videos shortlisted for public vote to decide which should be the basis of a $10m competition to develop green technology ideas<p>It sounds like the ultimate in the internet eating itself - a prize for coming up with the best competition to find crazy green technologies, helped along by an online public vote and a collection of two-minute YouTube videos.</p><p>But with a $10m <a href="http://www.xprize.org/">X-prize</a> ultimately at stake - plus $25,000 for the people who dream up the best competition to award that prize - there is the potential for a huge impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.</p> <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2008/nov/24/xprize-energy">Continue reading...</a>Energy efficiencyRenewable energyEnvironmentEnergyEnergyTechnologyClimate changeClimate changeMon, 24 Nov 2008 16:55:47 GMThttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2008/nov/24/xprize-energyJames Randerson2008-11-24T16:55:47Z